NF Getting your Civil War history from magazines?

Non-Fiction

major bill

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
I am sure many forum members purchase Civil War magazines. Some Civil War magazines were/are interesting reading. Although fine for the average American to get a taste of Civil War history, how much history can forum members learn from magazine articles?

For example, if the current Civil War Times magazine had a 8 page article about Gettysurg, to include color illustration, photos, and maps, how much new information would I learn? The amount of new information I learned would depend on what part of the Battle of Gettysburg the article was about as well as my level of knowledge before I read the article.

To be honest, a 6 to 12 page article can only cover a limited amount of information and once you subtract illistrations, the information presented is a bit brief. I do not believe that the Battle of Gettysburg can adequately be covered by such a brief article. However, this does not indicate Civil War magazines have no histortical value. There are subjects that probably can be presented in a short article.

Last night I read an article in a magazine about the Battle of Glorieta Pass. An author can not do much more in 10 pages than give a brief summary of this battle. Although I enjoyed reading the article, I have read 4 or 5 books about the War in the far west and am not sure Iearned too much new information. But what about a person who has never visited the Battle of Glorieta Pass nor never read any books about the Civil War in the far west?

Still a while back I read a magazine article about the First Battle of Mesilla. This battle was included in the 4 or 5 books I have read on the War in the far west. Still the books only briefly covered the First Battle of Mesilla, so the magazine article probably covered the battle in roughly the same depth as the books. I am assuming some forum members whose interests are more focused on eastern Civil War battles might learn a fair amount of new information by reading this article about the First Battle of Mesilla.
 
One thing about magazine articles is that unlike a full book, they are focused on one single topic and can devote all theit attention to researching that topic.

For example, years back America's Civil War had an article strictly on drunken officers. They talked about the unwritten rule, that as long as you stated on your horse during the battle, you wouldn't get arrested. So a drunk Confederate officer ordered a staff member to keep him in his saddle. It also mentioned that Joseph Hooker is supposed to have taken a vow of abstinence prior to the Chancellorsville Campaign and at least one staff member attested to his being sober the entire time.

Or the article that focused on the experiences of wounded men post-War and described an incident where a young man went to see his fiance, by upon her seeing his arm having been taken off, she broke off the engagement because as she told him, "If I can have all of you, I don't want any of you."

Another article focused exclusively on the incident in Brazil where a Confederate ship was sunk in a neutral Brazilian port and it caused an international political incident, which was onky resolved when US ships fired a salute to Brazil.

So I think there is indeed much good to be had with reading them.
 
At a minimum the "usual suspects" - CWT, ACW, and Monitor - are excellent supplements to other reading. Sometimes an author will provide a truncated version of his/her book which is nice to have as a summary. More and more they also feature stand alone articles that focus on a topic which is missing from the published world - such as the excellent Wittenberg article in the current issue of ACW on the August 1862 cavalry fight at Orange Court House. It's unfortunate that B&G met its demise because that was truly a set of unique articles covering a specific battle/event in detail with numerous maps and tour guide.
 
The magazines (and my Kindle) are much easier to take on an airplane. I usually take the usual suspects and a Gettysburg magazine. If I'm waiting a while for a plane, I get a bit of amusement of noticing the men in the area starting to eye the magazine and then me reading it :sneaky: trying to figure out, "how could she be interested in that?"
 
I like the magazines for light reading, like 5- 10 min at a time, aka little boys room. I get more from reading my regimental histories or going on here in the AM while I eat my breakfast.
My favorite bedtime stories are re-reading research articles and lighter stories relating to the era, all found in my collection of the early (hardbound) American Heritage Magazine. I learned my letters and numbers and basic mapreading as a tot on those wonderful periodicals. Thanks to my great-grandfather... his charter-member subscription pays dividends to this day.
 
The magazines (and my Kindle) are much easier to take on an airplane. I usually take the usual suspects and a Gettysburg magazine. If I'm waiting a while for a plane, I get a bit of amusement of noticing the men in the area starting to eye the magazine and then me reading it :sneaky: trying to figure out, "how could she be interested in that?"
Good on ya. 🙂 I left out Gettysburg only because it's more like Civil War History and it clearly has content which is "stand alone".
 
I don't read any Civil War magazines, but I do read other history magazines.

There's definitely articles that seem like a waste. Gettysburg, Lee, or Lincoln are well-known and 10 pages barely scratches the surface anyway. But 10 pages on Glorietta Pass is useful because it's a fairly obscure engagement. Or something specific about Gettysburg, like a specific general or regiment.

I want magazine articles (and presentations at conferences) to avoid what I call "The Wikipedia Problem." In 10 minutes I could read a long Wikipedia article so the magazine or speaker needs to do at least one of the following:

1. Be more detailed than the Wikipedia article.

2. Be about something that isn't covered on Wikipedia.

3. Have new research that challenges what is commonly know thus is contrary to Wikipedia.

4. Be about something interesting and/or important that I would have never thought to look up on Wikipedia.

Yes, Wikipedia isn't perfect, but it's the go-to modern encyclopedia everyone has at their fingertips, which wasn't true of Britannica or Worldbook.
 
At a minimum the "usual suspects" - CWT, ACW, and Monitor - are excellent supplements to other reading. Sometimes an author will provide a truncated version of his/her book which is nice to have as a summary. More and more they also feature stand alone articles that focus on a topic which is missing from the published world - such as the excellent Wittenberg article in the current issue of ACW on the August 1862 cavalry fight at Orange Court House. It's unfortunate that B&G met its demise because that was truly a set of unique articles covering a specific battle/event in detail with numerous maps and tour guide.

Luckily, B&G is back...and I have to testify to its usefulness recently, as we had our Vicksburg CWT get-together...I ordered the back issues on that topic and studied faithfully--even while we were there I re-read information or looked at photos. Helped me process what the members were saying as we toured.
 
Luckily, B&G is back...and I have to testify to its usefulness recently, as we had our Vicksburg CWT get-together...I ordered the back issues on that topic and studied faithfully--even while we were there I re-read information or looked at photos. Helped me process what the members were saying as we toured.
Where did you hear that it's "back"?
 
re-reading research articles and lighter stories relating to the era, all found in my collection of the early (hardbound) American Heritage Magazine. I learned my letters and numbers and basic mapreading as a tot on those wonderful periodicals.
A great source even now! American Heritage's website is still a great source; sadly, they do not have the fantastic illustrations that were such a great part of the print magazine.
 
I don't read any Civil War magazines, but I do read other history magazines.

There's definitely articles that seem like a waste. Gettysburg, Lee, or Lincoln are well-known and 10 pages barely scratches the surface anyway. But 10 pages on Glorietta Pass is useful because it's a fairly obscure engagement. Or something specific about Gettysburg, like a specific general or regiment.

I want magazine articles (and presentations at conferences) to avoid what I call "The Wikipedia Problem." In 10 minutes I could read a long Wikipedia article so the magazine or speaker needs to do at least one of the following:

1. Be more detailed than the Wikipedia article.

2. Be about something that isn't covered on Wikipedia.

3. Have new research that challenges what is commonly know thus is contrary to Wikipedia.

4. Be about something interesting and/or important that I would have never thought to look up on Wikipedia.

Yes, Wikipedia isn't perfect, but it's the go-to modern encyclopedia everyone has at their fingertips, which wasn't true of Britannica or Worldbook.

There's been a few interesting articles about Grant that I've read, such as the incident in the photographer office where the window above him shattered or debating just how realistically an alcoholic he really was.

But the many articles of famous people in-War do tread much of the same group again and again.
 
Back
Top